Report it is observe the committee accepted a contribution that means its over the limit of a corporation so the committee files a report which happens all the time why our contribution from abc corporation the committee admitted it accepted and it happens all the time the committee discloses receiving money from sue commissioner president dwight smith and received another money added together over 500 contribution limit as mr. Sincroy said no investigation is note in order to reach the conclusion that the committee should forfeit the money and objective weve asked the commission for the forfeiture matters there are one hundred about dont quote me in every single one a corporate contribution that was over the limited that was missing information and Important Information there was absolutely in question from the face to face of report that the committee accepted a contribution and thats why the city asked to forfeit the money we are here because of the 2 1 2 year that by definition thi
The agenda with the simplification. I came to talk about a need for responding to complaint both filed with you as well as those referred to the suspect Ordinance Task force because im involved in would both aspects of complainant an incident in december of 2013 when i complained about nearly a year ago ive never heard a response nothing not to say were looking at it it selfcome within our jurisdiction silence thats a problem because what i was on the commission about mike dparz we talked about whether complaints what about stale so the fact ive not heard makes me wonder maybe i h had a valid point but want to talk about the complaints referred to the shoerns task force ive had complaint where i got a unanimous or overwhelming vote sometimes id get a response you dont think this would hundred thousand dollar hold up in court i spent time on the task force envelope was there a draft of minutes or instruction to the shoerns on those saying there has to be a Court Lawsuit case present to
Of complainant an incident in december of 2013 when i complained about nearly a year ago ive never heard a response nothing not to say were looking at it it selfcome within our jurisdiction silence thats a problem because what i was on the commission about mike dparz we talked about whether complaints what about stale so the fact ive not heard makes me wonder maybe i h had a valid point but want to talk about the complaints referred to the shoerns task force ive had complaint where i got a unanimous or overwhelming vote sometimes id get a response you dont think this would hundred thousand dollar hold up in court i spent time on the task force envelope was there a draft of minutes or instruction to the shoerns on those saying there has to be a Court Lawsuit case present to ethics thats not been communicated to the task force or communicated to complainants when we make a complaint i have several overwhelming unanimous decisions get figuratively gotten away what is your criteria and not
Should use the drought and bosco to use the drought for its customers brown about we should say to our urban computers and use this moment look we need to save a lot more water we as agencies need to do a lot more weve only touched the tip of the eyes beggar on recycle so, yes we need to say that to all our customers whether in urban assistance but it is agriculture 40 percent of use in california we had not mentioned agriculture what about agriculture and that person said theyre not allowed to draw surface water theyre drawing ground water we correctly appointment to the person look we could use that ground water in the emergency to save the smelt and slam and we said do big agree have significant restrictions on the way they use water the answer was no ill calling on puc and bosco to pound the pulpit that the impunity of water use is no longer acceptable and big agreeing needs not to be raising beef and other things to not constantly going to our urban customers saying you and your p
Thank you. The next item is constitution and possible action regarding a letter sent to supervisor farrell on december 9, 2014 mr. St. Kci. Chair i need to recuse myself from this matter thank you. So the commission demonstrated at the last meeting to request that supervisor farrell respond to the forfeiture letter the staff issued in december to determine what if any further actions to take on had matter i believe that someone representing mr. Farrell is here. Is there a representative of many farrell here . Thank you, commissioners for the opportunity to discuss this matter im sure youre aware of we submitted a detailed letter outlining the reasons why we believe strongly that forfeiture is not warranted in that matter and it is on the citys behave of the forfeiture request most noblely supervisor farrell has done absolutely nothing wrong the fcc xhublthd a two year discussion where everyone involved with this looked at hundreds of thousands of emails and they completely exaggerated